Miscellaneous Requests & Change Ideas
Started by Simon, May 27 2004 01:52 PM
OK I'll go first.
CHANGE THE TITLE!
Actually The BRC web site has been updated recently and on it the BRC/IOP Packaging Standard is referred to as ‘BRC Global Standard - Packaging', which is line with the other standards ‘BRC Global Standard - Food' and ‘BRC Global Standard - Consumer Products.'
It looks ‘nailed on' that ‘BRC Global Standard - Packaging' will be the title of issue 2 of the Standard.
Regards,
Simon
CHANGE THE TITLE!
Actually The BRC web site has been updated recently and on it the BRC/IOP Packaging Standard is referred to as ‘BRC Global Standard - Packaging', which is line with the other standards ‘BRC Global Standard - Food' and ‘BRC Global Standard - Consumer Products.'
It looks ‘nailed on' that ‘BRC Global Standard - Packaging' will be the title of issue 2 of the Standard.
Regards,
Simon
[Ad]
Simon,
You are absolutely right, and I could not agree more with you.
It is completely unlogic that on the BRC standard we have already the 3rd revision, while on the BRC/IOP nothing has changed since October 2001.
In my opinion, BRC gave (and still giving) much higher priority to BRC standard than to the BRC/IOP which is by definition, a little (or a lot), out of their field of comprehension.
In my opinion, first and most inportant, they should clearly mention the HACCP, with all relevant stages in the standard itself, and not going in rounds, avoiding a lot of misunderstanding.
moshes
You are absolutely right, and I could not agree more with you.
It is completely unlogic that on the BRC standard we have already the 3rd revision, while on the BRC/IOP nothing has changed since October 2001.
In my opinion, BRC gave (and still giving) much higher priority to BRC standard than to the BRC/IOP which is by definition, a little (or a lot), out of their field of comprehension.
In my opinion, first and most inportant, they should clearly mention the HACCP, with all relevant stages in the standard itself, and not going in rounds, avoiding a lot of misunderstanding.
moshes
Hi Moshes,It is completely unlogic that on the BRC standard we have already the 3rd revision, while on the BRC/IOP nothing has changed since October 2001.
In my opinion, first and most important, they should clearly mention the HACCP, with all relevant stages in the standard itself, and not going in rounds, avoiding a lot of misunderstanding.
It's good to hear from you again. :)
I think your first point is slightly unfair as the BRC Global Standard - Food has been around for quite a bit longer (1998) than the packaging standard (2001). The time is definitely right for a review though.
Regarding your comments on HACCP I think most users of the BRC/IOP Packaging Standard have used HACCP or a bastardised version of it as their model for carrying out the hazard analysis. We ‘packaging people' are now pretty comfortable with HACCP and I completely agree it would help to avoid misunderstandings if the Standard prescribed the use of HACCP in the next issue.
Thanks for your comments Moshes.
Regards,
Simon
In my country, BRC/IOP is currently offered by several consultants (particularly those from UK) but sadly, it has not quite been taken up widely enough.
In particular, those who are in the direct food contact packaging materials should really go it. Again, over here, the market is not driving the needs hard enough.
Personally, until suppliers of food contact packaging materials embrace BRC/IOP or some sort of system, you really have to treat these products with suspect. With due respect, ISO 9K companies are just isn't good enough to provide that assurance needed.
Most of the larger hypermarkets and huge retail players like Tesco etc are already in most parts of Asia. It is now timely for BRC/IOP to go global.
Charles Chew
In particular, those who are in the direct food contact packaging materials should really go it. Again, over here, the market is not driving the needs hard enough.
Personally, until suppliers of food contact packaging materials embrace BRC/IOP or some sort of system, you really have to treat these products with suspect. With due respect, ISO 9K companies are just isn't good enough to provide that assurance needed.
Most of the larger hypermarkets and huge retail players like Tesco etc are already in most parts of Asia. It is now timely for BRC/IOP to go global.
Charles Chew
Totally agree Charles.Most of the larger hypermarkets and huge retail players like Tesco etc are already in most parts of Asia. It is now timely for BRC/IOP to go global.
Regards,
Simon